Welcome to news, views and satire you can use. Anyone offended by this can be assured it is purely intentional.
For comments on this blog: ottozero2001@yahoo.com ★

otto's war room banner

Friday, October 07, 2016

US-led occupation of Afghanistan: 15 years of hell for the people with no end in sight

I post a lot of articles from A World
to Win News Service and I especially like this article. The occupation of
Afghanistan and Iraq are the most imperialistic and hypocritical foreign
policies since the big stick policies of Theodore Roosevelt. Not since the US colonialism of the Philippines has this country taken on such an obvious violation
of international law. The occupation of these countries and the persistence of
supporting puppet governments is major black mark on US history.

We will soon have a new president and chances are
the policies of nation building will likely get worse, not better. We need to
continue to oppose this degrading policy of nation-building puppetry.-សតិវ​អតុ

From A World to Win News Service:

The occupation of Afghanistan
by a coalition of Western powers headed by the US will have lasted fifteen full
years as of 7th of October.

Instead of any sign of an end to this war, there
are new plans for it to continue. US President Barack Obama, speaking on 6 July
this year, outlined his plan to keep 8,400 US soldiers in Afghanistan after his
presidential term comes to an end in January 2017, along with more than 6,000
Nato and other so-called coalition forces.

This is contrary to the promise Obama made during
his campaign for the presidency eight years ago. After several gyrations during
his term, beginning with a drastic increase in 2009 in the number of troops
from the level set by his predecessor President George W. Bush in a futile
attempt to win quick victory, and then large-scale troop reductions, in the end
he has opted to continue the occupation.

It has been proven over and over again that making
war is a permanent job of any president in order to fulfill US imperialist
interests, and Obama could not be an exception. Despite his efforts to pretend
he is not a warmonger, the US has been at war throughout his entire presidency.
It has troops fighting in Afghanistan, and now again in Iraq (where Obama just
sent additional troops to bring the number of US forces to more than 5,000), as
well as in Syria and Libya. American bombs and missiles are also killing people
in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen.

In his statement announcing the prolongation of
the war in Afghanistan, Obama tried to downplay the importance of this
decision.

"Compared to their previous mission – helping
to lead the fight – our forces are now focused on two narrow missions: training
and advising Afghan forces, and supporting counter-terrorist operations against
the remnants of al-Qaeda as well as other terrorist groups, including ISIL [the
Islamic State or Daesh]... Every day, nearly 320,000 Afghan soldiers and police
are serving and fighting, and many are giving their lives to defend their country."
(This and subsequent quotations from that speech are from the transcript
released by the White House on 6 July 2016.)

In order to cover up the real intention of the war
and the real cost to the Afghan people, Obama referred to gains he claimed have
been due to this war.

"With our support, Afghanistan is a better
place than it once was. Millions of Afghan children – boys and girls – are in
school. Dramatic improvements in public health have saved the lives of mothers
and children. Afghans have cast their ballots in democratic elections and seen
the first democratic transfer of power in their country's history. That
government is a strong partner with us in combating terrorism. That's the
progress we've helped make possible."

After 15 years of occupation and imposing a brutal
war on the people that has caused tremendous suffering, all that Obama could
point to is a number of boys and girls going back to school and unsatisfactory
improvements in public health that he falsely calls "dramatic".
Neither the number of children in school nor public health have regained the
levels reached before the Western imperialist intervention to support certain
jihadis, the brand of Islamic fundamentalist friendly to the US and Pakistan at
that time, in a war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in 1979-89.

Obama's reference to ballots and "democratic
elections" is especially hypocritical, since the winners of the elections
arranged by the US have been Hamid Karzai and then Ashraf Ghani, leaders of one
of the world's most corrupt regimes, even according to US officials and media.
Even with support from the occupiers, still both of them had to rig the
elections in order to win. Obama's statement is not much different from what he
said about Iraq on 14 December 2011:"We're leaving behind a sovereign, stable and
self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its
people." (CNSNews.com, 29 December 2014)

A "sovereign country" where the US
appointed the regime, in cooperation with reactionary forces in the region such
as Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, a place where foreign interference has made
political life a sideshow for most Iraqis. A "stable" country where
competition between these powers has constantly roiled conflicts, and Daesh has
been able to advance up to within a few miles of the capital Baghdad. Obama
made no reference to Abu Ghraib and other prisons where the US forces tortured
and murdered people, mainly ordinary people, enabling the conversion of these
prisoners into Daesh supporters. He made no reference to the bloody sectarian
war that the US triggered and fuelled, resulting in the murder of tens of
thousands of people and the displacement of millions. He made no reference to
the Islamisation of Iraq under the US-led occupation that dramatically changed
the life of Iraqi people and especially women, and finally gave birth to
horrible forces such as Daesh. He made no reference to other horrific
consequences this has inflicted on the people of Iraq and Middle East.

Similarly, in his statement on Afghanistan, Obama
made no reference to what the people of Afghanistan have gone through due to an
unjust and brutal war waged by the Western imperialists. He didn't refer to
tens of thousands of innocents who lost their lives due to bombardment and the
war. He made no reference to the terrorised children who woke up in the middle
of night to see their parents held at gunpoint by US troops. He did not mention
the people who were repeatedly stopped and searched by the occupier forces. For
the last fifteen years, the US has launched bomb and missile attacks on many
village gatherings. In the latest, a US drone strike hit a village celebration
in Nangarhar province on 28 September, killing at least 15 civilians and
injuring another 13, according to the UN. (Guardian, 30 September)

Obama boasts about the "dramatic"
improvements in public health, but doesn't mention the hospitals bombarded. In
one of the most notorious incidents, a US gunship destroyed a Medecins Sans
Frontiers hospital in Kunduz in September 2015, murdering at least 42 patients
and medical personnel and injuring another 30.

In talking about the corrupt regime the US had
"democratically" elected, Obama doesn't mention the rights of the
many thousands who were insulted, imprisoned and horrifically tortured at
Bagram and other US and Nato-controlled military bases in Afghanistan, people
who were arrested and falsely accused of connections with al-Qaeda or the
Taliban, and who, after they were released, became determined to join the
Taliban. He doesn't mention those tortured to death even without the formality
of a trial.

Obama referred to combating terrorists groups, but
he made no reference to the fact that Islamic fundamentalists are stronger than
ever in Afghanistan, thanks to the occupation. Once hated by the majority of
the people in Afghanistan, now due to the occupiers and their appointed regime
and its atrocities the Taliban have managed to gain support in many parts of
the country, even places where they never had much before, such as Badakhshan,
in the northern part of the country. He did not say that Daesh is gaining
ground in Afghanistan too. The US-led occupation has been a huge factor in the
fundamentalists' growing strength.

The occupation has brought nothing like liberation
to Afghanistan's women. In fact they have been the worst victims of this
occupation and war. Their most basic rights have been put on sale explicitly
and implicitly to keep US-favoured jihadis happy and draw the Taliban to the
negotiating table. This has resulted in some of the most scandalous cases such
as the amendment of family laws, the rape and kidnapping of young women with
impunity, and the climate that led to crimes like the notorious murder of Farkhunda
and the stoning of Rakhshana.

What about the reconstruction of the economy and
the nation-building initially promised by the occupiers? Obama prefers to say
nothing about that, either. We can see for ourselves the features of an economy
that has been "reconstructed" by the US and other imperialist
occupiers. The Afghan economy is mainly built on growing poppy for opium
production and export. Afghanistan currently supplies about 90 percent of the
world opium market. Millions of people are employed or involved in some way in
the drug trade. Both the US occupiers and the Taliban encourage this.

Another pillar of the Afghan economy is the
"aid" provided by the occupiers and other donor countries. The US
government has injected $115 billion into the Afghan economy, supposedly for
the country's reconstruction. (New York Times, 17 September 2016) As a result,
the economy became addicted to money provided by the occupiers. Further, this
produced enormous corruption, especially among jihadist warlords and other
government bureaucrats. The overall situation has left millions no choice but
to either leave the country or live on the money family members abroad send
back home. Not only have decades of war forced millions to seek refuge in
neighbouring and other countries, but now the current economic situation is
also pushing the more well-off section of people and especially the younger
generation to leave the country and look elsewhere for a home.

The US imperialists have spent more than a
trillion dollars in a war that has directly caused the deaths of more than
150,000 civilians and soldiers and wounded many more. The war has also
indirectly caused the death of hundreds of thousands of others and the
suffering of millions of people. This has certainly not been done to bring some
boys and girls back to school, but in pursuit of the US's global interest and
regional interests.

Reducing troops to continue the occupation

Boasting about his efforts to deflate US
involvement, Obama cited the reduction of US troops from 100,000 to fewer than
10,000 and the alleged change in their mission, from fighting to training and
advising Afghan forces and supporting counter-terrorist operations. But he
immediately referred to 320,000 Afghan soldiers and police the US is trying to
organize to fight its battles in Afghanistan.

First of all, reducing the numbers doesn’t change
the nature of the mission. The nearly 15,000 troops from the US and its
"coalition" are many more than enough to make them invaders and
occupiers. Consider that the US and its allies started their occupation with
30,000 troops. Secondly, regardless of their numbers, these forces are pursuing
the same goal that has guided them since the 2001 invasion, to dominate
Afghanistan and control a strategically important region, and serve the
regional and global interests of US imperialism. Keeping 100,000 US soldiers in
Afghanistan was unsustainable for the US. The draw-down did not change the
nature of the war or represent anything like an end to the war. It was a change
in tactics by Obama and his administration and its military leaders to make
that war sustainable at the cost of Afghan lives. The Afghan national army lost
nearly 3,000 officers and soldiers in 2013, and since then its losses have at
least doubled.

The US has also been trying to
"legalise" its military and political presence for the indefinite
future by arranging a bilateral strategic treaty with the Afghan government.
This treaty, signed by president Ghani, discloses the US's real intention,
which is to continue the occupation as long as it can. It gives the US
continued access to nine major land and air bases, including Bagram, Jalalabad
and Kandhar. It allows the US to keep its aircraft and many Special Forces and
"advisers" in the country at least until the end of 2024, with the
option of renewing the treaty at that time. This agreement also gives immunity
to US troops from any Afghani law. No US soldier can be arrested or put on
trial by Afghans.

The war with Taliban

The Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan was
followed by several years of bloody infighting among the jihadi warlords who
had led the war against them. Cvilians were slaughtered. Much of Kabul was
destroyed. This led many people to support the Taliban takeover in the 1990s,
organized by Pakistan, with support from Saudi Arabia and Qatar and the
implicit agreement of the US. After the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World
Trade Centre and Pentagon, the US decided it had to intervene directly in
Afghanistan. But the people that the US and its allies put in power in place of
the Taliban were not much different ideologically. The difference was that they
were more friendly to the US and the West, or opportunistically appeared that
way, or did not care who dominated the country as long as they had a share in
the power. After the US-led invasion, the Taliban took advantage of the
discontent among Afghans about the occupation and the atrocities committed by
the occupiers and their appointed regime, which became more widespread as the
war continued.

The US is aware of the extreme corruption of the
regime and the atrocities committed by its armed forces because they are
trained to do so, but they are simply incapable of doing without all this. The
US is also well aware that after 15 years the war is deadlocked.

The Taliban faces serious limitations. They no
longer enjoy the US support or neutrality that enabled them to come to power
two decades ago. They are a reactionary and fundamentalist force. When in
power, they are brutal and oppressive to women, non-Pashtun nationalities, and
other religions, and so they will have a hard time uniting many provinces and
peoples. The contradiction between their Pashtun chauvinism and other
nationalities such as the Tajik , Hazara and Uzbeks is very acute. Despite
their advance in some areas, they have not been able to seize power countrywide
or in major cities. For instance, they recently grabbed parts of the northern
city of Kanduz for the second time, but had to quickly retreat.

Yet the US and its coalition may have reached the
conclusion that they will not be able to defeat the Taliban. The US could not
put an end to the ambitions of the Taliban and their backers when it had more
than 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, and now the Taliban are again making military
advances. US frustration was clear from a comment by a "senior
administration official on the condition of anonymity". He refers to
Afghan forces, but could well also mean the US forces who are leading them:

"It does not appear that the Afghan forces in
the near future will be able to defeat the Taliban… Nor is it clear that the
Taliban will make any significant strategic gains or be able to take and hold
on to strategic terrain. It is a very ugly, very costly stalemate." (New
York Times, 17 September 2016)

This prospect, however, will not stop the US from
seeking to preserve its interests by other means. Its solution is to include
the Taliban in a power-sharing deal. That would consequently increase the
influence of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in
Afghanistan. As Obama put it in explaining US efforts to draw the Taliban to
the negotiating table, "The only way to end this conflict and to achieve a
full draw-down of foreign forces from Afghanistan is through a lasting political
settlement between the Afghan government and the Taliban. That's the only way.
And that is why the United States will continue to strongly support an
Afghan-led reconciliation process."

So all the talk about liberating women and peace
and prosperity has evaporated into thin air. The promises about democracy have
produced nothing but a puppet, corrupt regime. Instead of eliminating
fundamentalist terrorism, the war has ended up being a war to force the Taliban
to the negotiating table.

The US and its appointed regime are trying to
achieve that, but it seems it has not been working so far. In order to convince
the Taliban to negotiate, the US also has to convince Pakistan, now deeply
involved in contention with India over regional influence, and Saudi Arabia and
the Gulf states in their contention with Iran. Other countries are also
involved.

The solution of the imperialists is continued
occupation, at least given the present world situation. Considering this
situation, the particular limitations of the imperialists and the present
balance of forces, they don't really have other options. From the US point of
view, no increase or decrease of forces, and no amount of support or further
training by US advisers for the so-called Afghan national army, can solve this
problem.

As for their opponents, the Islamic fundamentalist
forces such as the Taliban, Daesh and Al-Qaeda who are opposing the present
Afghan regime, despite their conflicts based on mutual religious and national
differences, they are all oppressors, too, and like the regime are aligned with
reactionary regimes abroad. To say the least, they are also part of the problem
and can never be part of the solution.

The forces on both sides of the conflict are
trying to hang on until they find an opportunity. The US and Taliban or
Pakistan or any other player in the conflict may not prefer the present
situation, but they can also take advantage of it and help continue the war in
Afghanistan, even if at a lower intensity. Pakistan can prevent the proposed peace
agreements and keep Afghanistan unstable, and the US also has a “good” excuse
both at home and internationally to continue its occupation at a more
sustainable cost, at least until a more settled situation in the world is
achieved, which might not be any time soon.

The people of Afghanistan, whose interests should
be paramount in this complex situation, are not considered important by the
reactionaries. A revolutionary force that can rely on the people and has a
clear and unambiguous position against both the imperialist occupiers and the
reactionary fundamentalist forces could resolve the problem in the interests of
the masses. What is needed is a revolutionary party whose goal is to end all
exploitation and oppression and lead the masses to liberate themselves from the
mess that the imperialists and the reactionary fundamentalists and their
backers have created in Afghanistan – and around the world.

Otto's Books

Books

Featured Post

By Harsh Thakor TODAY ON 75TH ANNIVERSARY OF VICTORY OF BATTLE OF STALINGRAD LET US HAIL ERSTWHILE USSR WHO WON A VICTORY THAT WAS THE GR...

Webstats

Gonzo Journalism

RED DE BLOGS COMUNISTAS

The cost of maintaining US Imperialism is high!

No other country in the world puts as much of its budget into the military as the US. This country is the top imperialist power in the world today and that is costing us a lot of resources that are badly needed elsewhere.